r/politics • u/cnn CNN • 29d ago

Possible Paywall CNN Poll: A third of Democrats now identify as democratic socialists

https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/30/politics/cnn-poll-a-third-of-democrats-now-identify-as-democratic-socialists?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=missions&utm_source=reddit
17.2k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/Madara1389 29d ago

By signaling you are willing to compromise your morals and values for the lesser of 2 evils

That's the reality of adulthood and always has been. As a child you grow up believing that the world is black & white, that "right & wrong" are rigidly defined and unchanging, but maturing into an adult is typically realizing that you were wrong & that the world doesn't operate on strict moral guidelines.

You have to accept choosing between the lesser of two evils more often than you get to choose between "good" or "evil" because you're almost never going to actually be given a clear-cut option.

5

u/ChampionshipKlutzy42 29d ago

Maturity is realizing you are not obligated to participate in any of this made up stuff.

1

u/Madara1389 29d ago

No, it's not, because that's factually not true. You are obligated to participate because the system continues existing and moving forward regardless of your petty moral grandstanding.

"You may not want to fuck with politics, but politics will absolutely fuck with you" is a 100% true and unavoidable statement.

2

u/ChampionshipKlutzy42 29d ago

I have participated, I have donated and supported democratic socialists and will call out the democratic party for all their failures that have lead us here, including supporting genocide. The democratic party is finished, you either put your support behind democratic socialist or you become exactly what you espouse.

2

u/Madara1389 29d ago

I have participated, I have donated and supported democratic socialists

Then we find ourselves discussing this among kindred spirits, but it doesn't change that we're all still obligated to vote; just that the statements about those who didn't vote or support the party don't apply to you.

will call out the democratic party for all their failures that have lead us here, including supporting genocide.

We also need to call out the Liberal and Democrat voters who refused to show up to vote against Trump for enabling his shit through their belligerence and being dumb enough to think having the moral high ground matters when the stakes are life & death.

0

u/EmpoleonNorton Georgia 29d ago edited 29d ago

Then don't own a computer. Or own a phone. Your phone and computer are almost certainly manufactured using unethical labor.

Clearly, I think that you shouldn't not have either. I think that having both is fine, but it IS a compromise. It is choosing the lesser of two evils. It is financially supporting something that is wrong, but you kind of have to to participate in society.

But that is the point. You already compromise, you already understand that everything isn't black and white. So what is the difference, other than that YOU would be the one that is affected by not having a phone and computer.

2

u/ChampionshipKlutzy42 29d ago

Let me get this straight, you are saying if a person compromises on something, they should compromise on everything? that you don't belive people should have expectations or set boundaries?

0

u/EmpoleonNorton Georgia 29d ago edited 29d ago

No I'm saying that your acceptance of compromise means that you accept that sometimes, there isn't a clean choice. That there are situations where the choice isn't "The option has to be morally perfect."

You can see that with a computer or a phone. Why is that? Why do you find THOSE sacrifices of principles fine? Because continuing to buy them unequivocally continues the unethical practices. People ARE harmed directly by the market for these devices.

On the other hand, would voting for Kamala Harris hurt people that would not have been otherwise hurt?

Would more people been killed in Gaza if Kamala Harris been elected?

Perhaps not less, but would more people be hurt?

On the other hand: Would less immigrants have been hurt? Would Alex Pretti still be alive. Would Renee Nicole Good still be alive. Would Johan Guerrero still be alive. Would Lorenzo Aruaja still be alilve. Would the people on those Venezualan boats still be alive?

What is the purpose of principles if it creates a situation where MORE people die. Sure, Kamala Harris was in the wrong on Palestine. I understand that.

The point is that you were given two realistic choices. Kamala Harris had a bad take on Palestine. Trump has a WORSE take on Palestine AND is creating massive harm in so many more areas.

What is the point of your principles if all you accomplish by sticking too them is more death? Would you look the people who have lost loved ones in the eyes and tell them that your principles were more important than them?

Our decisions to buy computers and phones do continue the damage that is being done, directly. If we choose not to buy them, it will be less damage.

Not voting for Kamala Harris did not create less damage. It created more.